The plausibility of John 3:18

[Reformed1689]

Perhaps that is because I do not ascribe to a single theory. IMHO the atonement is too important a doctrine to leave it up to picking which theory we believe best fits. The reason I believe this is because so much is built on our view of the atonement.

If you know your history then your comments that my view seems to be "all over the place" was merely insult and not a genuine comment. If you don't, then I can accept your confusion.

Yes, my view flows "between theories". I believe that the ECF's had something to say even though we do not always accept the way they said it. We use illustrations to explain our views, as did they. And, as you probably know, the most common way of viewing the atonement in the early church was with the Father as some sort of referee between the Son and Satan. We both would agree that this is not correct - BUT what they were trying to communicate may not be so off target.

Are you a fairly recent seminary graduate (within 5 years)? Was it online? Are you under the age of 40...ish? I want to know how close I am regarding my estimation based on your comments.

Well then no wonder people think you are all over the place because you actually are. Flowing in and out of theories.

Why don't you list a simple summary of your view. Keep it short and to the point.

And again, we are not talking about age and credentials. It is irrelevant. You and I went to the same school, have the same degree, and no it was not completely online.

 

[JonC]

Well then no wonder people think you are all over the place because you actually are. Flowing in and out of theories.

Why don't you list a simple summary of your view. Keep it short and to the point.

And again, we are not talking about age and credentials. It is irrelevant. You and I went to the same school, have the same degree, and no it was not completely online.

I understand. You simply do not know opposing theories so you believe them to be "flowing in and out of theories" rather than a view apart from them (between theories). Perhaps this is because what you hold is a reformed version of Roman Catholic dogma.

My view is that the Atonement is more than a moral response to a moral problem. I believe sin is more pervasive than simply disobedience to God. Jesus taught that sin was also a power under which man was enslaved. I believe this to be true. Paul taught sin was penal, but more than this he taught that sin was a power under which man was enslaved. I believe he was correct on both accounts.

Where we differ is that I do not believe Scripture is a buffet where we pick and choose what to believe. We can never deny one passage in our affirmation of another. Sin is penal. I've repeatedly said that. But it is also a power that has mastered mankind.

That, in a snapshot, is my view which you have argued tooth and nail against. That and the fact that I believe those who are condemned are condemned because they do not believe in the only begotten Son of God.

I take I was correct in estimating your maturity?

 

[Reformed1689]

Where we differ is that I do not believe Scripture is a buffet where we pick and choose what to believe.

We don't differ there actually.

We can never deny one passage in our affirmation of another. Sin is penal. I've repeatedly said that. But it is also a power that has mastered mankind.

You do realize that I never said otherwise. But there was one post that you implied, whether you meant to or not, that it was never a moral transgression.

That, in a snapshot, is my view which you have argued tooth and nail against. That and the fact that I believe those who are condemned are condemned because they do not believe in the only begotten Son of God.

And yes, I still argue against this. That is their ultimate condemnation, someone called it sentencing, but that is not the initial reason we are penalized. We are penalized for the ACT of sin. We see this in Genesis 1-3.

 

[The Biblicist]

God condemns men for their own sin, not the sin of others. Revelation 20:11-15.


Giving a reference is never a missquote. Now if you think that reference does not apply that is another matter. For which I would ask you why?

Obviously you have no interest in truth as you could not take the challenge I gave you nor could you give any reasonable response to the evidences placed before but just repeated the same error again.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

For example, Paul makes the case that man has sinned apart from that sin being a transgression (here, of a specific command).

What text are you thinking of here? Is it Romans 5:13-14?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I an suggesting that those who are condemned are so because they do not believe.

Of course they will die in their sins. Scripture repeatedly states that forgiveness is obtained through repentance and belief, and that Christ is the Object of that belief.

So are those condemned condemned solely for not believing, of for their sins in general?

That said, the "deadly danger" is John's writing, not JonC's writing.

I fear it is otherwise.

 

[JonC]

So are those condemned condemned solely for not believing, of for their sins in general?

I fear it is otherwise.

I look at it this way:

Jesus said (as recorded by John):
John 3:10-21
10 Jesus answered and said to him, "Are you the teacher of Israel and do not understand these things?
11 "Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not accept our testimony.
12 "If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?
13 "No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.
14 "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;
15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.
16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
17 "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
18 "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 "This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.
20 "For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.
21 "But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God."

If you fear it is otherwise, you need to take that up with God - not me.

But since you did take it up with me I'll let Him know you'll be inquiring and perhaps demanding otherwise.

(I joke, but you do realize that I did not expound on the passage....just stated it....right?)

 

[JonC]

Obviously you have no interest in truth as you could not take the challenge I gave you nor could you give any reasonable response to the evidences placed before but just repeated the same error again.

Yep. You got me. I have no interest in truth. I just want to wallow here in a bed of lies. Congratulations on your discernment.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I don't mean it snarky,

Oh boy! Yes you do!

but your inference it is pretty much answers my question. Let me guess....mid to late 30's....maybe early 40's but I doubt it....

Wow! What wonderful insight! It could have anything to do with the picture on the avatar, could it?

graduated within the past five years...probably online courses? There is a difference when we look at how people like @The Biblicist and @Reformed hold and defend their position. This is a difference that comes with maturity.

Well at least he's holding down a position as a Pastor. How about you?

Again, not an insult

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I look at it this way:

Jesus said (as recorded by John):
John 3:10-21
10 Jesus answered and said to him, "Are you the teacher of Israel and do not understand these things?
11 "Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not accept our testimony.
12 "If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?
13 "No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.
14 "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;
15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.
16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
17 "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
18 "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 "This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.
20 "For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.
21 "But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God."

If you fear it is otherwise, you need to take that up with God - not me.

But since you did take it up with me I'll let Him know you'll be inquiring and perhaps demanding otherwise.

(I joke, but you do realize that I did not expound on the passage....just stated it....right?)

Thanks for quoting a pile of Scripture, but I did know it's in the Bible. Now, how about answering my question?
So are those condemned condemned solely for not believing, of for their sins in general?

 

[JonC]

Thanks for quoting a pile of Scripture, but I did know it's in the Bible. Now, how about answering my question?
So are those condemned condemned solely for not believing, of for their sins in general?

Those who are condemned are condemed because they do not believe in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

We just have to "agree to disagree".

 

[Reformed1689]

Those who are condemned are condemed because they do not believe in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

We just have to "agree to disagree".

Why do they need to believe in the first place?

 

[JonC]

Oh boy! Yes you do!
Wow! What wonderful insight! It could have anything to do with the picture on the avatar, could it? Well at least he's holding down a position as a Pastor. How about you?

I don't know how accurate one's avatar may be. I tend to think yours is pretty accurate .
That said I know many heretics who held down a position of pastor. One was here in the past and I am confident he was not even a believer. Pkus, I am not sure he is a pastor (some churches call anyone in the ministry "pastor"...I know one that has an "event pastor" who decorates the church).

 

[The Biblicist]

Yep. You got me. I have no interest in truth. I just want to wallow here in a bed of lies. Congratulations on your discernment.

Jon, I was not responding to your post but to the post of 37818 at #170. How you got it I don't know. I presented evidence that his use of Ezekiel 18 was simply false. Were you quoting his post?

I rechecked my post and in the heading it is 37818 that I responded to.

 

[JonC]

Why do they need to believe in the first place?

Because that is what the passage says.

Your argument here is not with me, David.

I think it is because we were purposed to do God's will and not ours. But I accept that those who believe are not condemned and those who don't are already condemned because they don't believe because that is what the Bible says.

I do not understand why you cannot simply believe the passage.

 

[Reformed1689]

Because that is what the passage says.

If you look at it under a microscope and ignore the rest of Scripture, yes.

Your argument here is not with me, David.

It's with your theology and biblical interpretation.

I think it is because we were purposed to do God's will and not ours. But I accept that those who believe are not condemned and those who don't are already condemned because they don't believe because that is what the Bible says.

I do not understand why you cannot simply believe the passage.

Oh I believe the passage, and I believe you interpret it incorrectly. There is a reason we have to believe in Christ.

Did Adam need to believe in Christ before the fall?

 

[JonC]

If you look at it under a microscope and ignore the rest of Scripture, yes.



It's with your theology and biblical interpretation.



Oh I believe the passage, and I believe you interpret it incorrectly. There is a reason we have to believe in Christ.

Did Adam need to believe in Christ before the fall?

When you run across Scripture, like this one, that stands in opposition to your theory, you can't simply ignore it for passages you can twist i to a mold.

 

[Reformed1689]

When you run across Scripture, like this one, that stands in opposition to your theory, you can't simply ignore it for passages you can twist i to a mold.

I'm not ignoring it. I affirm it. But you also dodged a question. Did Adam have to believe in Christ for eternal life before the fall?

 

[SovereignGrace]

I am not twisting anything. I am saying that he who does not believe has been judged already because he has not believe in the name of Christ. The verse states "he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

If you disagree than I suspect it is your theology guiding your misinterpretation as the text is very plainly stated. Unless, of course, you reject that Christ IS the "only begotten Son of God"....that is the only part I was not exact on (I used "Christ" instead of "only begotten Son of God").

Pal, I don’t reject that the Christ is the only begotten of God. Your actions are quite unbecoming of someone who a moderator of a Christian site. To even make that statement is in bad taste, but that’s you.

Here’s how this goes. Say I am born in a place where the gospel has never been proclaimed. A place where no bible has even been seen, handled, read. I can look at all I see there and know there is a god. However, all I see doesn’t tell me that God sent His Son to live, be crucified, rise again three days later and ascend to the Father. If I die in my sins, I was condemned, not because I rejected the Christ, but because I was born condemned/judged already in Adam.

 

[Iconoclast]

No. With respect, this is the deadly danger of taking one text and bouncing up and down on it like a trampoline.
Those who are condemned are so because they do not believe, but the reason that they are condemned is that their sins are not forgiven. 'Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.' On the cross, Christ has paid in full for the sins of everyone who will trust in Him (John 1:36) -- He is the propitiation for their sins (1 John 1:5 - 2:2).. But He who does not believe is not united to Christ by faith and therefore has no propitiation for His sins and will therefore die in them.

Of course, you are correct. when men deny biblical truth as taught, error follows. People who have no access to a bible still sin and die as condemned because they die in their sins as you have posted.
They were not given a choice to believe in Jesus or not. They do not know Jesus exists, but they sin nevertheless as they have a sin nature and are spiritually dead.